The  Nation-Wide  Campaign 


5 


Wif  (Sonitni0gion  on  ttif  (SlrorrH 
anil  Social  Sfrblro 

REV.  JOSIAH  STRONG,  CHAIRMAN 

OF  THE 

3fffbfral  (Ununrtl  of  (fliurrijPH 
of  Qli|rt0t  to  Amfrira 


PROF.  SHAILER  MATHEWS.  President 
REV.  CHARLES  S.  MACFARLAND.  SECRETARY 


Continuous  Toil  and  Continuous  Toilers 


OR 

One  Day  in  Seven  for 
Industrial  Workers? 


PUBLISHING  DEPARTMENT 

Federal  Conncil  of  the  Churches  of  Christ  in  America 

612  United  Charities  Building 
lOS  East  22d  Street,  New  York  City 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Columbia  University  Libraries 


https;//archive.org/details/continuoustoilOOfede 


Continuous  Toil  and  Continuous  Toilers 

OR 

One  Day  in  Seven  for  Industrial  Workers? 

Slje  National  (Campaign 

BY 

©Ijv  (Eommtaaion  on  tlja  Olljnrrlf 
anb  €>orial  ^orntro 

OF  THE 

Jffpbwal  ffionnril  of  tl}o  QHjnrrlfpa  of  Cflljriat 
in  Atttprira 

“Six  days  shall  thou  labor.”  Our  modern 
industry  has  repudiated  the  commandment, 
while  modern  society  has  given  its  consent. 
In  December,  1908,  the  Federal  Council  of 
the  Churches  of  Christ  in  America,  in  session 
at  Philadelphia,  declared  that  “the  churches 
must  stand — for  a release  from  employment 
one  day  in  seven.”  This  was  an  effort  to  bring 
society  up  to  a serious  reconsideration  of  one 
of  the  ten  commandments  which,  when  ob- 
served, had  vindicated  its  inestimable  economic 
and  moral  value  to  the  social  order  for  several 
thousand  years. 

The  campaign  of  the  churches  began  with 
an  investigation  by  this  Commission  in  the 
steel  industry  in  the  early  part  of  1910.  It 
was  not  intended  that  the  report  of  this  investi- 
gation should  be  in  any  way  invidious.  It  was 
simply  presented  as  a concrete  illustration  to 
make  clear  a generally  increasing  and  alarm- 
ing situation. 


During  the  past  two  years  the  Commission, 
acting  through  the  denominational  social  serv- 
ice secretaries  and  departments,  has  organized 
a committee,  distributed  among  the  various 
states,  numbering  in  all  about  six  hundred 
church  leaders  and  social  leaders,  and  entered 
into  arrangements  with  the  American  Associa- 
tion for  Labor  Legislation,  which  was  arrang- 
ing to  prepare  legislative  measures  for  the 
various  states,  the  Committee  of  the  Com- 
mission on  the  Church  and  Social  Service 
caring  for  the  moral  forces  of  the  campaign, 
the  legislative  aspects  being  left  to  the  Associa- 
tion for  Labor  Legislation. 

A moral  awakening  on  the  question  has,  in 
varying  measure,  been  produced  or  deepened 
by  the  various  state  committees. 

In  several  communities  Federations  of 
Churches  and  local  Social  Service  Committees 
have  taken  up  their  local  situations,  with  ef- 
fectiveness according  to  their  measure  of  ear- 
nestness. 

In  a considerable  number  of  instances  em- 
ployers of  labor  have  been  known  to  take  vol- 
untary action  reducing  or  abolishing  seven  day 
labor,  and  since  the  report  of  the  Commission 
relative  to  the  steel  industry  a considerable 
and  increasing  improvement  has  taken  place  in 
that  industry. 

The  following  review,  however,  indicates 
that  the  situation  was  far  more  serious  than 
was  realized  and  that  this  evil  has  as  yet  been 
only  slightly  mitigated,  although  it  would  ap- 
pear that  the  previous  reckless  increase  in 
seven  day  labor  has  been  halted  by  the  cam- 
paign. 


4 


The  American  Federation  of  Labor,  at  At- 
lanta, November,  1911,  passed  the  fojlowing 
resolution,  introduced  by  John  B.  Lennon,  a 
member  of  this  Commission : 

“Whereas,  The  Federal  Council  Commission 
on  the  Church  and  Social  Service  is  undertaking 
a nation-wide  campaign  to  secure  for  all  indus- 
trial workers  one  day’s  rest  in  seven;  and 

Whereas,  The  American  Federation  of  Labor 
is  unqualifiedly  on  record  for  the  same  for 
many  years,  and  has  been  efficiently  working  to 
that  end;  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved,  That  we  heartily  appreciate  the  co- 
operation of  the  “Commission  on  the  Church  and 
Social  Service”  to  the  end  of  securing  the  one 
day’s  rest  in  seven,  and  pledge  to  the  Commis- 
sion, and  to  all  others  who  may  assist  in  this 
work,  our  hearty  and  earnest  assistance.” 

The  organizations  of  labor  are  to  be  credited 
with  the  initiation  of  this  great  moral  reform 
in  industry  and  with  great  influence  in  cre- 
ating sentiment  long  before  this  Commission 
was  appointed.  The  Commission  has  worked 
with  them  on  this  as  on  other  matters  of 
mutual  concern  and  interest. 

At  the  same  Convention,  Rev.  Charles  S. 
Macfarland  received  and  addressing  the  Con- 
vention as  a fraternal  delegate  from  the  Fed- 
eral Council,  also  held  a conference  with  the 
leading  representatives  of  Unions,  including 
the  Steel  Workers,  Bakers,  Restaurant  Work- 
ers, Trolley  men.  Postal  Service  employes, 
and  about  twenty  other  bodies  affected  by 
seven  day  labor,  and  the  plans  of  the  Com- 
mission were  heartily  endorsed  by  these  repre- 
sentatives on  behalf  of  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  workers. 


5 


At  the  beginning  of  the  campaign  no  state 
in  the  Union  had  effective  laws  requiring  one 
day’s  cessation  of  labor  in  seven,  but  since  that 
time  New  York  and  Massachusetts  have 
passed  measures  which  promise  effectiveness, 
and  other  legislatures  seem  to  promise  favor- 
ably. 

The  following  is  a statement  prepared  by 
John  A.  Fitch,  formerly  of  the  Pittsburgh 
Survey,  author  of  “The  Steel  Workers.” 

THE  SEVEN-DAY  WEEK  FORTOILERS 

There  are  only  two  conceivable  explana- 
tions for  the  existence  of  seven  day  labor. 
One  is  that  its  advance  has  been  so  gradual 
and  insidious  that  the  public  has  not  realized 
its  growth,  and  the  other  is  that  in  some 
strange  and  unaccountable  way  the  mind  and 
conscience  of  the  public  has  become  atrophied 
with  respect  to  that  particular  problem.  We 
may  accept  the  first  hypothesis  as  the  correct 
one — although  there  is  surely  some  basis  for 
the  second — for  there  exists  a most  lamentable 
ignorance  regarding  the  extent  of  the  con- 
tinuous industries  with  their  attendant  evils. 
Before  we  can  properly  give  them  considera- 
tion, we  must  marshal  such  statistical  data  as 
is  available.  The  very  scarcity  of  such  data 
reveals  both  ignorance  and  unconcern. 

THE  FACTS  IN  THE  CASE 

In  a report  by  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Labor, 
based  on  an  investigation  conducted  in  1910 
and  covering  173,000  employes  in  blast  fur- 
naces, steel  works  and  rolling  mills  in  the 
United  States,  it  was  stated  that  50,000  men, 

: ^ 


29  per  cent,  of  the  whole  number  considered, 
were  working  seven  days  a week.  Twenty  per 
cent,  worked  not  only  seven  days  a week  but 
twelve  hours  each  day,  and  43  per  cent,  worked 
twelve  hours  a day  for  six  days  a week  or 
more.  The  amount  of  seven  day  work  has 
been  modified  considerably  since  that  report 
was  made,  but  the  12-hour  day  remains  un- 
changed. 

These  figures  did  not  include  the  Bethlehem 
Steel  Company,  which  had  been  the  subject  of 
a separate  investigation  earlier  in  1910.  The 
figures  published  in  that  report  applied  to 
January,  1910.  Out  of  9,184  men  on  the  pay- 
roll, 2,628  worked  seven  days  a week.  Of 
these,  79  men  worked  over  13  hours  a day, 
three  worked  just  13  hours,  three  worked 
twelve  hours  and  45  minutes,  and  2,322 
worked  twelve  hours  a day.  In  addition  to 
these,  2,233  men  worked  twelve  hours  a day 
for  six  days  in  the  week  and  there  was  a total 
of  4,725  men,  51  per  cent,  of  the  entire  pay- 
roll, who  worked  twelve  hours  a day  six  or 
seven  days  a week.  These  were  the  regular 
schedules.  Overtime  applied,  however,  with 
regard  to  a large  number  of  the  employes,  so 
that  when  all  were  included  who  were  work- 
ing seven  days  a week  in  that  month,  the  total 
reached  4,041,  43  per  cent,  of  the  entire  pay- 
roll. 

No  other  continuous  industry  has  been 
studied  so  carefully  as  steel.  But  there  are 
figures,  although  of  a more  general  nature, 
which  throw  considerable  light  upon  the  ex- 
tent of  such  industries.  In  1907  a special 
committee  of  the  Massachusetts  legislature 


7 


made  an  investigation  in  order  to  determine 
the  number  of  persons  engaged  in  seven-day 
labor.  They  did  not  take  an  industrial  census 
and  they  did  not  include  factories,  but  after  a 
considerable  amount  of  investigation  they  esti- 
mated that  there  were  221,985  persons  work- 
ing seven  days  a week  in  the  State  of  Massa- 
chusetts. This  represented  over  seven  per 
cent,  of  the  total  population  of  the  state. 

In  the  state  of  New  York  an  inquiry  was 
sent  out  by  the  State  Department  of  Labor 
in  1910  to  the  secretaries  of  trade  unions  ask- 
ing them  to  report  the  amount  of  seven-day 
labor  among  their  members.  Replies  were  re- 
ceived from  unions  having  an  aggregate  mem-  ; 
bership  of  over  300,000  which  is  over  26  per 
cent,  of  the  wage-earners  of  the  state.  Of 
this  number  it  was  reported  that  35,742 
worked  at  their  regular  employment  seven 
days  in  the  week.  This,  it  will  be  noted,  is 
nearly  12  per  cent.  If  such  a percentage  ob- 
tains as  to  union  labor,  it  is  natural  to  presume 
that  a much  higher  percentage  would  apply 
in  the  case  of  non-union  labor. 

In  1910  the  Minnesota  State  Bureau  of 
Labor  reported  that  in  various  trades,  occupa- 
tions and  industries  in  that  state  there  were 
98,558  people  engaged  in  seven-day  labor. 
This  was  about  five  per  cent,  of  the  population 
of  the  state.  In  Massachusetts  the  estimated 
percentage,  excluding  factory  labor,  was  over 
nine  per  cent.  It  is  not  surprising  that  the 
more  densely  populated  state  of  Massachu- 
setts, with  its  larger  cities  and  greater  mile- 
age of  steam  and  electric  railroads,  should 
have  a larger  percentage  of  seven-day  labo’’  i 
than  semi-agricultural  Minnesota.  It  would  i 


8 


be  fair  to  assume  that  that  percentage  would 
be  nearer  the  correct  one  for  the  manufact- 
uring states  than  Minnesota’s  figure.  If, 
however,  we  take  five  per  cent,  as  the  propor- 
tion for  the  entire  country,  industrial  as  well 
as  non-industrial  centers,  we  should  have  a 
total  of  over  4,500,000  people  engaged  in 
seven-day  labor. 

WHAT  IS  A CONTINUOUS  INDUSTRY? 

That  indicates  something  as  to  the  enormity 
of  this  evil.  It  ought  not  to  require  further 
demonstration  that  there  is  need  not  only  of  a 
study  of  this  problem  but  of  immediate  relief. 
It  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  there  are  two 
forms  of  continuous  industries.  Those  that 
for  any  reason  are  operated  seven  days  a 
week,  whether  day  and  night  or  not,  and  those 
that  are  operated  day  and  night,  whether  for 
seven  days  a week  or  not.  In  other  words, 
there  are  many  continuous  industries  oper- 
ating 24  hours  a day  for  six  days  and  shutting 
down  over  Sunday.  That  is,  properly  speak- 
ing, a continuous  industry.  There  are  other 
industries  operating  only  in  the  day  time  but 
not  closing  on  Sundays.  These  also  are  con- 
tinuous industries.  It  is,  of  course,  unneces- 
sary to  add  that  there  are  also  industries  oper- 
ating day  and  night  and  seven  days  a week.  It 
is  possible  to  solve  the  problem  of  the  con- 
tinuous industries  so  far  as  their  working 
schedules  now  afford  hardship  and  injustice. 
That  solution  involves  not  only  one  day  of 
rest  in  seven  for  the  continuous  seven-day  in- 
dustries but  an  eight-hour  day  for  the  con- 


9 


tinuous  day  and  night  industries.  We  cannot 
regard  either  one  of  these  reforms  as  more 
than  a half  solution  standing  by  itself. 

THE  ATTITUDE  OF  OTHER  NATIONS— 
ENGLAND 

We  may  well  consider  what  foreign  coun- 
tries have  done  in  the  way  of  meeting  this 
same  problem  which  exists  not  less  in  Europe 
than  in  America.  England,  beyond  passing 
a law  requiring  a weekly  half-holiday  for  mer- 
cantile establishments,  has  done  very  little  in 
the  way  of  legislation  to  provide  for  periods  of 
rest.  Yet  the  principle  of  rest  periods  is  more 
firmly  entrenched  in  England,  probably,  than 
in  any  other  country  in  the  world.  This  in- 
volves not  Sunday  rest  alone,  but  a Saturday 
afternoon  half-holiday  as  well.  To  what  ex- 
tent this  may  be  due  to  the  labor  unions  which 
in  some  of  the  continuous  industries  in  Great 
Britain  are  very  strong  we  are  not  informed. 
That  they  have  had  a great  influence  in  the 
proper  solution  of  the  question  of  the  con- 
tinuous industries,  however,  there  is  no  doubt. 

THE  EIGHT-HOUR  DAY 

The  continuous  industry  problem  cannot 
possibly  be  solved  until  two  adjustments  have 
been  made.  There  must  be  one  day  of  rest  in 
seven,  but  where  an  industry  operates  day  and 
night,  as  well  as  seven  days  a week,  there 
must  also  be  three  shifts  of  workers  in  the 
24  hours,  giving  a period  of  employment  of 
eight  hours  each.  In  the  steel  industry  of 
Great  Britain,  which  is  one  of  the  most  im- 


lO 


portant  of  their  continuous  industries,  just  as 
is  the  case  in  the  United  States,  union  agree- 
ments have  been  so  worked  out  that  a full  half 
of  the  steel  workers  of  the  United  Kingdom 
are  to-day  working  in  three  shifts  of  eight 
hours  each.  Practically  all  of  the  blast  fur- 
naces of  the  North  of  England  are  on  the 
eight-hour  basis.  The  tin  industry  has  en- 
tirely gone  to  the  three  shift  principle  and  the 
open-hearth  steel  furnaces  of  South  Wales 
and  to  some  extent  of  the  North  of  England 
also,  are  to-day,  on  account  of  union  agree- 
ments, working  eight  hours. 

GERMANY 

In  Germany  neither  the  unions  nor  the  law 
have  come  to  any  great  extent  to  the  defense 
of  the  workers  in  the  steel  industry.  In  fact, 
the  situation  with  them  is  very  similar  to  that 
in  the  United  States.  The  workmen  in  the 
steel  mills  are  on  duty  twelve  hours  a day  and 
in  the  departments  continuous  through  the 
week  through  technical  necessity,  such  as  blast 
furnaces,  the  workmen  are  employed  seven 
days  a week.  The  law,  however,  in  Germany 
requires  that  in  any  work-day  of  twelve  hours 
there  shall  be  at  least  two  hours  rest  for  meals, 
so  the  actual  labor  period  is  not  over  ten  hours. 
Some  agitation  has  arisen  in  Germany  for  a 
law  requiring  an  eight-hour  day,  but  as  yet  no 
serious  consideration  has  been  given  to  it  by 
the  legislative  bodies. 

FOREIGN  COUNTRIES  WHERE  RELIEF  HAS 
BEEN  GAINED 

In  other  countries,  however,  legislation  has 
been  resorted  to  definitely  with  the  idea  of  af- 
fording some  relief  to  the  workers  in  the  con- 


tinuous  seven-day  industries.  In  France  and 
Italy  these  laws  are  the  most  complete.  In 
those  countries  the  law  requires  that  Sunday 
shall  be  the  day  of  rest.  It  then  proceeds  to 
enumerate  by  very  careful  definitions  the  in- 
dustries which  are  for  one  reason  or  another 
necessarily  continuous.  It  permits  those  in- 
dustries to  operate  seven  days  a week  but  re- 
quires that  the  working  force  shall  be  so  ad- 
justed that  no  employe  shall  be  required  to 
work  more  than  six  days  in  any  week.  In 
order  to  make  this  effective,  the  law  provides 
that  the  employer  may  grant  a rest  day  at  any 
time  during  the  week  and  allow  his  employes 
a day  off  by  rotation. 

While  this  law  is  farthest  reaching  and 
broadest  in  these  two  countries,  the  same  prin- 
ciple has  been  enacted  into  law  in  a dozen  dif- 
ferent states  of  Europe.  The  simple  principle 
is  that  for  the  requirement  of  labor  on  Sunday 
there  shall  be  some  compensating  period  of 
rest.  Laws  embodying  this  principle  have 
been  put  upon  the  statute  books  of  countries 
not  only  in  Europe  but  in  all  parts  of  the 
world.  These  countries  include  Argentine 
Republic,  Austria,  Bosnia,  Herzegovina,  Bel- 
gium, British  India,  Canada,  Cape  of  Good 
Hope,  Chili,  Denmark,  France,  Germany, 
Italy,  Portugal,  Roumania,  Spain,  the  federal 
government  of  Switzerland  and  seven  cantons 
of  Switzerland. 

FORWARD  MOVEMENTS  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES 

In  the  United  States  several  things  have 
happened  which  may  lend  some  encourage- 
ment to  those  who  hope  to  see  a solution  of 


the  continuous  industry  problem  on  the  right 
lines.  No  legislation  on  this  subject  can  be 
so  effective  or  so  desirable  as  voluntary  action 
on  the  part  of  the  people  involved  in  those  in- 
dustries. No  statutory  regulation  is  so  likely 
to  be  enforced  as  a regulation  agreed  upon  by 
operators  or  in  conference  between  operators 
and  employes.  So  it  is  a cheerful  sign  that 
the  lead  smelters  of  Colorado,  Montana,  Ne- 
vada and  Utah,  almost  without  exception,  con- 
tinuous seven-day  industries  as  they  are,  oper- 
ate with  three  shifts  of  men  working  eight 
hours  each.  That  is  a long  step  forward, 
even  though  they  do  not  as  yet  provide  for 
one  day  of  rest  in  seven.  The  vast  majority 
of  the  paper  mills  of  New  York  and  New 
England  have  adopted  the  eight-hour  day. 
The  Sharon  Steel  Hoop  Company  of  Sharon, 
Pennsylvania,  since  1904  has  had  an  eight- 
hour  day  on  its  rolling  mills.  The  Cambria 
Steel  Company  of  Johnstown,  Pennsylvania, 
has  an  eight-hour  day  in  many  of  its  depart- 
ments which  are  operated  continuously  day 
and  night  for  six  days.  In  Granite  City, 
Illinois,  the  Commonwealth  Steel  Company, 
operating  a large  steel  foundry,  has  adopted, 
with  results  satisfactory  to  itself  and  to  the 
men,  an  eight-hour  day  in  its  open  hearth 
department. 

For  more  than  a year  the  United  States 
Steel  Corporation  has  had  a standing  rule  that 
there  shall  be  a day  of  rest  for  every  man  in 
the  employ  of  the  Corporation.  This  has  been 
made  possible  by  increasing  the  working  force 
in  the  company’s  seven-day  departments  so  that 
there  shall  be  enough  workers  to  man  the  plant, 
while  1/6  of  the  force  on  each  day  of  the 


13 


week  is  idle.  The  same  rule,  with  modifica- 
tions, has  been  adopted  by  the  Lackawanna 
Steel  Company  and  some  of  the  other  inde- 
pendent companies.  The  American  Telegraph 
and  Telephone  Company  has  had  this  rule  in 
force  for  half  a dozen  years  with  most  satis- 
factory results. 

INDUSTRIES  YET  ALMOST  UNTOUCHED 

These  are  the  encouraging  things  but  they 
are  only  the  beginning  and  the  number  of  men 
affected  is  as  a drop  in  the  bucket  in  com- 
parison with  those  who  are  still  working  in 
the  various  continuous  industries  of  this 
country  and  have  no  hope  of  relief  in  either  of 
the  ways  suggested,  through  a rest  day  or 
through  an  eight-hour  shift.  The  railroads 
have  made  no  movement  in  the  direction  of 
providing  a rest  day  for  their  employes  and 
the  street  car  companies  have  done  so  only  in 
so  far  as  they  have  been  compelled  by  con- 
tracts with  the  union.  In  addition  to  these 
great  industries  employing  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  men  seven  days  in  every  week  there 
are  a countless  number  of  smaller  industries 
and  occupations  not  usually  called  industries, 
such  as  restaurants  and  hotels,  barber  shops, 
dairies  and  ice  companies,  where  the  employes 
are  regularly  on  duty  without  a day  of  rest 
and  whose  members  in  the  aggregate  reach 
many  hundreds  of  thousands. 

LEGISLATION  SEEMS  BOTH  NECESSARY 
AND  PRACTICABLE,  THOUGH  SOME- 
TIMES DIFFICULT 

So,  however  desirable  voluntary  action  may 
be,  however  preferable  to  legislation  the  wil- 
lingness of  employers  to  make  voluntary 


agreement  or  voluntarily  to  olfer  to  their  em- 
ployes relief  from  the  depressing  and  burden- 
some effects  of  continuous  toil,  it  has  not 
been  sufficient  to  justify  the  hope  that  the 
problem  will  settle  itself  in  that  way.  The 
only  recourse  that  a humane  and  socially- 
minded  public  can  have  in  such-  a case  is  to 
the  law  making  body.  It  is  desirable  and 
necessary  that  laws  shall  be  enacted  requiring 
an  eight-hour  shift  in  the  industries  continu- 
ous day  and  night  and  requiring  one  day  of 
rest  in  seven  for  the  industries  operating 
seven  days  in  the  week.  For  however  desir- 
able continuous  industries  may  be — and  they 
are  not  only  desirable  but  absolutely  essential 
to  the  comfort  and  even  the  very  existence 
of  many  thousands  of  people — we  cannot  have 
continuous  workmen.  Neither  can  we  have 
good  citizens  unless  we  see  to  it  that  they 
have  opportunity  to  rest  during  a sufficiently 
long  period  and  with  a sufficient  degree  of 
frequency  as  to  enable  them  to  maintain  the 
strength  and  vigor  of  their  bodies. 

Said  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  the  state  of 
New  York  in  People  vs.  Havnor  (149  New 
York  195)  : “It  is  to  the  interest  of  the  state 
to  have  strong,  robust,  healthy  citizens, 
capable  of  support,  of  bearing  arms,  and  of 
adding  to  the  resources  of  the  country.  Laws 
to  effect  this  purpose  by  protecting  the  citizen 
from  overwork,  and  requiring  a general  day 
of  rest  to  restore  his  strength  and  preserve 
his  health  have  an  obvious  connection  with 
the  public  welfare.” 

So  far  as  the  eight-hour  day  is  concerned, 
there  are  practical  difficulties  in  the  way,  for 
the  courts  have  held  that  the  hours  of  labor 


15 


of  adult  males  may  not  be  regulated  by  law 
unless  there  is  some  special  and  compelling 
reason  for  interfering  in  such  a manner  with 
their  freedom  of  contract.  To  be  sure,  the 
courts  have  ruled  that  under  certain  circum- 
stances the  hours  of  labor  of  grown  men  may 
be  regulated ; for  example,  in  railway  employ- 
ment. But  the  reason  for  this  restriction  upon 
the  liberty  of  the  citizen  is  in  order  to  pro- 
tect the  public  from  the  danger  of  accident 
that  might  ensue  if  overworked  and  overtired 
men  were  permitted  to  control  the  operation 
of  the  trains. 

Again,  the  courts  have  held  that  laws  regu- 
lating hours  of  labor  in  mines  and  smelters 
were  valid  laws  on  account  of  the  peculiar  risk 
incurred  by  the  employe  in  breathing  danger- 
ous fumes  and  gases.  Those  industries  were 
held  to  be  sufficiently  dangerous  so  as  to  make 
it  permissible  for  the  legislature  to  limit  hours 
of  labor  in  order  to  protect  the  health  of  the 
employes.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  scarcely 
necessary  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  the 
case  of  Lochner  vs.  New  York  held  that  it 
was  not  competent  for  the  legislature  of  New 
York  to  regulate  the  hours  of  labor  of  bakers. 

Yet  we  may  be  fairly  sanguine  as  to  the 
attitude  that  the  courts  might  take  if  a law 
were  passed  requiring  that  in  the  continuous 
industries  a man  should  not  be  permitted  to 
work  more  than  eight  hours  a day.  It  is  evi- 
dent from  the  opinion  of  the  court  in  Holden 
vs.  Hardy  that  it  was  made  clear  in  arguments 
and  briefs  submitted  in  that  case  that  there  is 
a danger  attendant  upon  underground  mining 
and  the  operation  of  smelters.  The  court 

i6 


was  so  impressed  by  the  evidence  presented 
that  they  felt  that  the  legislature  was  justified 
in  making  an  exception  of  the  employes  in 
those  industries  and  giving  them  the  protec- 
tion that  they  needed.  Apparently  it  was  not 
made  equally  clear  in  the  bakers’  case  that 
there  was  peculiar  danger  to  the  health  in  that 
industry.  For  when  the  Court  of  Appeals 
of  the  state  of  New  York  by  a majority 
of  one,  rendered  a decision  in  favor  of  the  law, 
one  of  the  dissenting  judges  took  occasion  to 
remark  that  it  would  indeed  cause  surprise 
among  the  housewives  of  the  nation  to  learn 
that  the  baking  of  bread,  an  industry  that  they 
and  their  mothers  and  grandmothers  had  been 
carrying  on  in  their  kitchens,  had  suddenly 
become  a dangerous  industry  requiring  the 
protection  of  the  law.  Apparently  it  could 
not  have  been  made  clear  to  this  judge  that 
a modern  bake  shop  such  as  found  in  our 
great  cities  to-day — often  in  cellars  with  no 
means  of  ventilation  and  where  the  heat  is 
intense,  where  men  are  required  to  work  often 
seven  days  a week  and  long  hours  of  labor 
every  day — that  the  baking  of  bread  under 
such  circumstances  is  a different  thing  from 
the  baking  done  by  the  average  housewife  in 
her  kitchen. 

The  courts  were  not  inclined  to  view  with 
favor  laws  regulating  hours  of  labor  for 
women  until  briefs  were  submitted  that  really 
discussed  the  merits  of  the  case  instead  of 
citing  precedents  and  legal  opinions  of  a 
former  generation.  The  Supreme  Court  of 
the  state  of  Illinois,  in  1894,  held  that  the 
hours  of  labor  of  women  could  not  legally  be 
regulated,  but  in  1910,  when  the  experience 


17 


of  the  world  regarding  women  in  industry  was 
placed  before  the  court,  and  it  was  given  an 
opportunity  to  see  what  the  hygienic  reasons 
are  for  demanding  such  legislation,  it  reversed 
its  earlier  opinion  and  held  that  it  was  a wise, 
humanitarian  and  necessary  measure  to  place 
a limit  upon  the  number  of  hours  per  day  that 
women  in  the  state  of  Illinois  may  be  per- 
mitted to  work. 

WHAT  WE  MAY  HOPE 

With  these  facts  before  us,  is  it  too  great 
a stretch  of  the  imagination  to  hope  that  we 
may  place  upon  the  statute  books  of  our 
states  laws  requiring  that  the  men  employed 
in  industries  which  operate  day  and  night, 
twenty-four  hours  in  the  day,  shall  not  be  per- 
mitted to  work  more  than  eight  in  the  twenty- 
four?  Is  it  too  much  to  expect  when  we  go 
before  a court  to  argue  that  such  a limitation 
is  reasonable  and  just  under  the  police  power 
of  the  state  in  order  to  protect  its  citizens 
from  the  debasing  effects  of  twelve  hours  a 
day  labor,  that  we  shall  be  able  to  convince 
the  court  of  the  reasonableness  of  our  claim? 
Is  there  not  justice  in  a classification  which 
separates  the  men  working  in  the  continuous 
industries  from  those  industries  which  are  not 
continuous  and  which,  therefore,  may  be  so 
adjusted  as  to  limit  the  hours  of  labor  without 
endangering  the  process  or  the  product  b)' 
stopping  the  plant?  When  the  difference  is 
made  clear  between  the  conditions  in  the  in- 
dustries which  operate  only  by  day  and  so  may 
be  limited  to  ten  hours,  eight  hours  or  even 
six  at  the  will  of  those  engaged  in  it  and  the 

i8 


continuous  industries  where  the  operation  of 
the  plant  cannot  be  limited  at  all — we  may 
reasonably  expect  that  the  courts  of  our  land 
will  not  be  inclined  to  resort  to  petty  quibbles 
over  freedom  of  contract  any  more  than  they 
have  been  in  the  case  of  workers  in  mines  and 
smelters. 

Already  the  legislative  bodies  have  begun 
to  recognize  the  necessity  of  such  regulation. 
Montana  has  a law  requiring  an  eight-hour 
day  for  hoisting  engineers  at  mines,  but  not 
for  all  such  hoisting  engineers.  This  limita- 
tion is  to  apply  only  where  the  mine  is  oper- 
ated 16  hours  or  more  per  day.  When  that 
is  the  case,  the  engineers  shall  not  be  required 
to  work  more  than  eight  hours  in  twenty-four. 
The  principle  has  been  recognized  by  Con- 
gress in  the  case  of  railroad  telegraphers.  The 
federal  law  fixes  a maximum  of  13  hours  a 
day  for  railroad  telegraphers  employed  in 
offices  open  only  in  the  day  time,  evidently 
recognizing  that  since  the  office  is  to  be  closed 
for  the  night  anyway,  it  is  conceivable  that  it 
may  be  closed  at  such  a time  as  to  give  the 
operators  even  less  than  a thirteen-hour  day. 
But  the  maximum  is  nine  hours  in  offices  open 
day  and  night. 

In  spite  of  these  encouraging  signs,  how- 
ever, we  recognize  that  the  difficulties  to  be 
surmounted  before  it  shall  become  judicially 
recognized  that  it  is  permissible  to  regulate 
hours  of  labor  for  men  are  very  great.  The 
other  regulation  which  must  be  made  before 
the  problem  of  the  continuous  industry  may 
be  solved  is  fortunately  of  a simpler  nature. 
From  the  year  1811  to  1909,  inclusive,  there 
were  at  least  71  cases  brought  before  supreme 

IQ 


courts  of  the  states  and  of  the  United  States 
where  the  question  of  the  constitutionality  of 
Sunday  legislation  was  an  issue.  The  Sunday 
laws,  of  course,  were  enacted  at  an  early  day 
before  our  industries  had  grown  so  great  as 
to  require  protection  for  labor,  and  they  were 
designed  by  religiously  minded  people  to  pro- 
tect the  Sabbath  from  desecration.  In  all  of 
these  71  cases,  except  one,  the  constitutionality 
of  the  Sunday  laws  was  affirmed.  But  the 
grounds  upon  which  this  decision  was  made 
are  of  vital  significance.  From  1866  to  1909, 
46  such  cases  were  decided.  The  grounds  of 
the  approval  of  those  laws  as  given  by  the 
courts  were  not  the  protection  of  the  Sabbath, 
they  were  not  the  prevention  of  the  desecration 
of  the  day,  they  were  not  the  protection  of 
religious  institutions ; but  with  a unanimity 
almost  complete  they  rest  their  decisions  as  to 
the  validity  of  those  laws  upon  the  power 
and  duty  of  the  state  to  protect  its  citizens 
from  overwork.  Again  and  again,  in  the 
strongest  of  terms,  the  courts  have  declared 
their  abhorrence  of  the  idea  that  men  may  be 
permitted  to  work  without  a day  of  rest.  Con- 
sequently, it  seems  fair  to  assume  that  if  laws 
were  enacted  requiring  one  day  of  rest  in 
seven  the  courts  would  still  recognize,  as  they 
have  before,  the  necessity  of  a day  of  rest 
and  will  not  be  deterred  from  approving  the 
law  on  the  ground  that  the  rest  day  may  not 
happen  always  to  fall  on  the  Christian  Sab- 
bath. This  is  fairly  clear  and  it  seems  also 
a reasonable  thing  that  the  courts  which  have 
in  such  explicit  terms  expressed  their  abhor- 
rence of  the  lack  of  an  adequate  weekly  rest 
period  will,  when  the  facts  are  fully  placed  be- 


20 


fore  them,  find  that  the  lack  of  an  adequate 
daily  rest  period  is  equally  abhorrent. 

The  time,  then,  appears  to  be  ripe  to  secure 
legislation  that  will  protect  these  continuous 
workers.  On  account  of  the  comparatively 
simpler  problem  that  is  involved  in  the  secur- 
ing of  a day  of  rest,  that  is  the  first  thing  to 
be  taken  up  and  fought  for.  But  immedi- 
ately after  having  gotten  that  under  way,  we 
should  be  false  to  the  principles  for  which  we 
profess  to  stand  if  we  should  not  also  take  up 
the  other  line  of  action  and  work  steadily  and 
consistently  for  a legal  limit  of  eight  hours 
in  the  continuous  industries. 


iFpJifral  ©ounrtl  ©ottimtHHion 

ON 

®l|p  (!ll|urrl]f  attb  hartal 

Rev.  Josiah  Strong,  Chairman 
Prof.  George  W.  Richards,  Recording  Secretary 

SECRETARIAL  COUNCIL 

Rev.  Henry  A.  Atkinson  Rev.  Frank  M.  Crouch 
Rev.  Samuel  Z.  Batten  Rev.  Charles  O.  Gill 

Rev.  Harry  F.  Ward  Rev.  Charles  S.  Macfarland 


COMMITTEE  OF  DIRECTION 


Prof.  Edward  T.  Devine 
Rev.  Henry  A.  Atkinson 
Rev.  Samuel  Z.  Batten 
William  F.  Cochran 
Rev.  Frank  M.  Crouch 
Miss  Grace  H.  Dodge 
Shelby  M.  Harrison 
Miss  Louise  Holmquist 


Rev.  J.  Howard  Melish 
Rev.  Frank  Mason  North 
William  B.  Patterson 
Gifford  Pinchot 
Rev.  Josiah  Strong 
Rev.  Charles  L.  Thompson 
Charles  R.  Towson 
Rev.  Harry  F.  Ward 


MEMBERS  OF  THE  COMMISSION 


Rev.  Ernest  H.  Abbott 
Rt.  Rev.  C.  P.  Anderson 
Roger  W.  Babson 
Mrs.  O.  Shepard  Barnum 
Bishop  S.  C.  Breyfogel 
Pres.  Franklin  E.  Brooke 
Pres.  George  C.  Chase 
Rev.  Orrin  G.  Cocks 
George  W.  Coleman 
Harris  R.  Cooley 
William  K.  Cooper 
Pres.  Boothe  C.  Davis 
Rev.  E.  Heyl  Delk 
John  J.  Eagan 
Prof.  Edwin  L.  Earp 
Richard  H.  Edwards 
Pres.  H.  L.  Elderdice 
H.  D.  W.  English 


Prof.  Daniel  Evans 
Homer  Folks 
Rev.  W.  R.  Funk 
Rev.  Samuel  M.  Gibson 
Rev.  Washington  Gladden 
John  M.  Glenn 
Prof.  Thomas  C.  Hall 
Prof.  C.  R.  Henderson 
Prof.  James  R.  Howerton 
Prof.  Rufus  M.  Jones 
Rev.  O.  F.  Jordan 
Paul  U.  Kellogg 
Howard  A.  Kelly,  M.  D. 
Rev.  J.  H.  Kendall 
Rev.  William  E.  Lampe 
John  B.  Lennon 
Owen  R.  Lovejoy 
Prof.  F.  E.  Lumley 


Bishop  Francis  J.  McConnell 

Rev.  J.  E.  McCulloch 

Miss  Mary  E.  McDowell 

A.  J.  McKelway 

Pres.  David  McKinney 

Rev.  H.  H.  McNeill 

Rev.  H.  H.  Marlin 

Rev.  J.  W.  Messinger 

Rev.  Alfred  E.  Meyer 

James  Alexander  Miller,  M.D. 

Pres.  S.  K.  Mosiman 

Rev.  C.  J.  Musser 

Rev.  John  P.  Peters 

Rev.  O.  W.  Powers 

Pres.  H.  F.  Rail 

Prof.  Walter  Rauschenbusch 

Rev.  John  A.  Rice 

Rev.  Peter  Roberts 

Mrs.  Raymond  Robins 

Miss  Helen  J.  Sanborn 

A.  M.  Scales 

Rev.  Doremus  Scudder 

Miss  Florence  Simms 

Willard  L.  Small 

Rev.  James  F. 


Rev.  Samuel  G.  Smith 
Prof.  Edward  A.  Steiner 
Rev.  Charles  Stelzle 
Chancellor  D.  S.  Stephens 
Rev.  Paul  M.  Strayer 
Rev.  Carlyle  Summerbell 
Very  Rev.  W.  T.  Sumner 
Rev.  E.  Guy  Talbott 
Fred  E.  Tasker 
Prof.  A.  W.  Taylor 
Prof.  Graham  Taylor 
Rev.  John  A.  Thurston 
Rev.  Worth  M.  Tippy 
Rev.  A.  J.  Turkle 
Rev.  Samuel  Tyler 
Bishop  Alexander  Walters 
Rev.  George  T.  Webb 
Rev.  A.  E.  Webster 
Pres.  Herbert  Welch 
Rev.  G.  Frederick  Wells 
Rev.  Leighton  Williams 
Rev.  Edward  S.  Wolle 
Miss  Carolena  M.  Wood 
Rev.  E.  S.  Woodring 
Zwemer 


COMMITTEE  ON  CHURCH  AND  COUNTRY  LIFE 

Gifford  Pinchot  Rev.  William  I.  Haven 

Pres.  Kenyon  L.  Butterfield  Henry  Wallace 
Prof.  Thomas  N.  Carver  Rev.  Warren  H.  Wilson 


Rev.  Charles  O.  Gill 
Field  Investigator 


Rev.  Charles  S.  Macfarland,  Secretary 
105  East  22d  Street,  New  York 

(The  Committee  of  the  American  Association  for  Labor 
Legislation  consists  of  John  A.  Fitch,  Charles  S.  Macfar- 
land, Charles  M.  Cabot,  Louis  D.  Brandeis,  Ernst  Freund, 
and  William  D.  Mahon.) 


NO.  48 


23 


. M 

littmfi  .voM  K-ittiKiO-jW  ?i  i|orl^iII  ■» 


tcii'unr)  .vj^l 

ah^rttpiS  .y.  .fl  if'lfwiiWO  ‘ 
.If  liiij'J  .vuVl  I 
.vjX 

TJiininS  .T  .V/  .V3»  x'-'V 

JtdfUr.'J’  yiil)  .3  .vjS'I 

loI'iiiT  .7/  ./.  .loi'J.U. 


nVmlliiUjK  .H'.l 

^ 'T^A 

I.'Wr.d  . jjj 
.H  .11 

iitlitt/.H.Il'vjH  '3 

.7/  .1, 

rjX'sU  .il 

.i^tlil^  T.jtxn eMiiiJ, 


mjsiltiO  .Ho'l 
iioUiuilT  ./  nili’l.  .vjJI 

.17  ifVioV/  .vjM 
',i4iirr  .1  .A  .voH 

Tolx’r  I jtlOlcJ',  .T-jJI 
eiillnW  -jiliiif/  il/v 

<)rf*»V/  .’I  .vnH 

.vaSI 

KlljW  ilai  .O  .vsJl 

vtru-.iHiV7  /iriJ/laii-1  .V-..M 
alloV/  .R  tiirwliH  .v»^I 
IiudV/  .17  r.ii'ilmn'.)  »eil7 
jjitnliooV/  .R  .Jl  .vaH 


TSiiii  (••X 


llliOlUflil/l  .H  .?. 

'>'j,=-?ijl/  .1.  .^1  .vaM 
hiil'/l  .'1  rid'il.  .v'lir 

; .77  .11  .V'jM  ■>: 

IIb'/I  .'■!  .11  .aa'i'l 
rf  j .(f<ln»ih-'«i:y  lellftV/'.loi'J 
.'  toiH  .A  iiilol  .vaH 
, ftli’xIcM  TJj-i'I  .vail  ’■' 

KiUlcill  liim/ii  (cH  .tr  jt4  ' 

F I'lijR  .17  >> 

■lilitiii jR  j!ijm ‘ii.M  .viM  . 

FCliini?,  aafi'jaol'l  iWiili? 
ll/anR  . I InB'lIi 77 
•.'•1  eamnX  .v,i!4 


5171.1  YMTKilU'J  ClkA  IDMUin  Y.O  5i;i'mT/UU'J 


n-.iv/.ir  .1  iiir.llliV/  .v.>H 

■ -iaBlilrV/  xi"'>ll 

iio/li  //  .H-iiamiV/  .V  »H 


JiioTlil) 

l)lvitialii)ll  . 1 .Mi‘1 

■toviaCl  .K  erniortT  .loi'J 


IliO  .O  ssalijirn  .vaH 
lp)B»)l?avnl  I)!'/)'!  , ..  . 

YXo ,<I /. .R 

;ltpV  ,1'«ilR-bS,S  JiBS  201 


;dj  1 i</l  i„.iifho«A-  fiiTjhani/  <.J||  K.  oaliiwmo'-)  arfT) 

nVyfiU  .?■  ,ii/iin  .A  uAo\ 

' * (I  ( Ir.flr-  \ ir  S"»!’1C.H  ) .hfinl 


liiiiisV'I  j>in51  .=>JaI'fu;’'Il 


*.C('  eiifOil  '‘.Jt'OV.O  .14  yalitH'l.  .tirihl 
(.tn)i!t;.t4  .(I  niiiiII,iV7  Imr. 


